Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRathod, KSen_US
dc.contributor.authorHamshere, Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorKhambata, RSen_US
dc.contributor.authorAndiapen, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorWestwood, Men_US
dc.contributor.authorMathur, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorAhluwalia, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorJones, DAen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-13T13:52:26Z
dc.date.available2017-07-20en_US
dc.date.issued2017-01en_US
dc.date.submitted2018-03-13T13:46:52.027Z
dc.identifier.issn2048-0040en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/34994
dc.description.abstractBackground: The local injection of novel cardioprotective study drugs prior to percutaneous coronary intervention could cause embolisation of thrombus, resulting in increased reperfusion injury and subsequent infarct size. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of the delivery of an intracoronary therapy delivered during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction prior to the re-establishment of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction III flow. Methods: One hundred sixty-seven patients with acute myocardial infarction successfully reperfused through primary percutaneous coronary intervention and undergoing Cardiac MRI within the first week after reperfusion were studied. Patients either underwent the delivery of an intracoronary agent (IMP or placebo) prior to balloon dilatation (n = 80) or standard primary percutaneous coronary intervention procedure (n = 117). Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. There were a similar number of successful procedures (IC IMP 75 (93.8%) vs. No IMP 114, (97.4%), p = 0.374), rates of no-reflow (IC IMP 1 (1.3%) vs. No IMP 2 (1.7%), p = 0.99) and levels of ST segment resolution (88.5% IC IMP vs. No IC IMP 87.0%, p = 0.669) between the two groups. Similar levels of microvascular obstruction were seen between the two groups with a trend to reduced infarct size, and improved ejection fractions in the IMP group. Lower MACE rates were seen in the IMP group. Conclusion: The local intracoronary infusion of potential cardioprotective agents prior to the restoration of TIMI flow in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction appears to be safe and does not increase microvascular damage. This route should be considered when testing novel cardioprotective agents.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThe author would like to thank National Institute for Health Research, UK and Heart Cells Foundation for the financial supporen_US
dc.format.extent2048004017725988 - ?en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJRSM Cardiovasc Disen_US
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjectAcute coronary syndromesen_US
dc.subjectCT and MRIen_US
dc.subjectcardiologyen_US
dc.subjectcardiovascular pharmacologyen_US
dc.subjectcatheter-based coronary interventions: stentsen_US
dc.subjectdiagnostic testingen_US
dc.subjectetiologyen_US
dc.subjecttreatmenten_US
dc.titleCombined analysis of the safety of intra-coronary drug delivery during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: A study of three clinical trials.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.holder2017. The authors
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/2048004017725988en_US
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29104752en_US
pubs.notesNo embargoen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
pubs.volume6en_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2017-07-20en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record